Lesbian Motherhood and Artificial Reproductive Technologies in North America: Race, Gender, Kinship, and the Reproduction of Dominant Narratives
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reviews current ethnographic literature on lesbian motherhood as it relates to artificial reproductive technologies (ART) through intersectional, biopolitical and critical-race frameworks. I argue that white, lesbian intending mothers intersecting identity markers of whiteness and queerness place them in a unique position within ART discourses. ART functions as a biopolitical mechanism which aims to normalize and naturalize privilege in hierarchized power structures, while suggesting that the meanings that it produces are objectively scientific rather than socially constructed. I suggest that ART mechanizes white lesbian women’s insecurities as queer women, nearing the falsified construction of ideal motherhood, by exerting pressure on them to conform and therefore, reproduce dominant reproduction narratives. Simultaneously, I assert that white, lesbian, intending mothers’ positionality could enable critical interrogation into the harmful social stratifications that ART perpetuates based on race, class, ability, and sexuality. In sum, a review of relevant literature is used to posit that women privileged within dominant ART discourses must utilize that privilege to create meaningful change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it